Lazy take. The overwhelming majority of the media makes the Democrat nominee out to be a hero and the Republican out to be the crazy zealot. We've seen it going back to the GWB years...who was portrayed as a right-wing hillbilly nut when in fact he was pretty moderate on most positions and not exactly one of the 'common folk'.Jeeper79 said:
"The media" is the new "it was stolen". It's never Trump's fault, just as he's trained his defeatist MAGA followers to react.
Will Donald Trump Blow Another Election? - WSJ Editorial Board
19,680 Views |
359 Replies |
Last: 15 days ago by jeremy
Tom Fox said:
Whether Trump is a good candidate or not is uninteresting. The interesting question is why would anyone vote for Kamala, much less half of Americans?
Insert Ryan Reynolds but why gif.
Just about half the country is going to vote against the other party regardless of who the candidates are. I can't believe this is still surprising to people. Minor 1-2% variations in circumstances are what will decide national elections. Joy Behar would get at least 48%. Bugs Bunny would get at least 48%. Joseph Stalin would get at least 48%. Beyonc would get at least 48%. A random plastic cup on the side of the road would get at least 48%. Because it's NOT the other party.
Youve been trained well.Rockdoc said:TexAgs91 said:
Republicans will 'blow' elections for as long as marxists cheat and they own 90% of the media
HTH
This is the correct response.
Republicans are the majority in the US House, governorships, aggregate state houses, and aggregate state senates. And they're just one seat away from parity in the US senate.
Republicans aren't blowing elections. This is a distinctly Trump problem.
Agree with this. The media is dishonest and utter propagandists for the Dem Party. That much has been proven by the way they covered up Joe's dementia and how their making the biggest empty suit of all time in Kamala look like a MENSA candidate.Gigem314 said:I agree that Trump's personality by nature gives his enemies more ammo...but some of you need to realize that even if he said nothing, the media would still find a narrative or past statement/association to make him look evil. They did it with Romney, who provided no more than a 'binder' or family trip with the dog or saying that people who don't pay taxes won't vote for him.4stringAg said:
If he gave them nothing and just stayed on message and policy points, they'd have to cover that.
The media is never going to lay off the Republican nominee. They will always find something. Every time. The key is making sure you have a nominee who fights back and can hammer away at the issues. That doesn't mean we need another Trump, but simply finding someone who isn't controversial is a fool's errand. The media will always make the Republican look controversial no matter how clean they are.
this.Rapier108 said:
Most likely he will, but of course his ardent followers will blame it solely on fraud, rather than the fact he is a crappy candidate with sky high negatives.
thisTexAgs91 said:
Republicans will 'blow' elections for as long as marxists cheat and they own 90% of the media
HTH
I'm all for a DeSantis or Youngkin ticket in 2028 that's Trump-like without as much controversy. But I believe we'll be having the same conversations about 'perception' and polls and questionable voting transparency in key states that we are now. It won't be much different.Quote:
Agree with this. The media is dishonest and utter propagandists for the Dem Party. That much has been proven by the way they covered up Joe's dementia and how their making the biggest empty suit of all time in Kamala look like a MENSA candidate.
Blow "another" election?
Jeeper79 said:Youve been trained well.Rockdoc said:TexAgs91 said:
Republicans will 'blow' elections for as long as marxists cheat and they own 90% of the media
HTH
This is the correct response.
Republicans are the majority in the US House, governorships, aggregate state houses, and aggregate state senates. And they're just one seat away from parity in the US senate.
Republicans aren't blowing elections. This is a distinctly Trump problem.
I've been trained to recognize the truth. You libs don't know what that is.
LOL.JohnnyAlamo said:
Lifelong Republican but I just can't vote for Trump after the voter fraud debacle and J6. I want honest elections in this country, but I need to see evidence of the fraud that supposedly took place. It's been 4 years and nothing but unproved theories and rumors. I have serious concerns Trump would try to remain in office for a 3rd term based on his past behavior.
What you posted is probably the stupidest thing I have ever seen posted on Texags in 20 years.
how's the weather in Georgia?
By reading all these posts on this subject, I suspect many on here (too many) will not "get it" until they've had everything taken away from them by the Marxists amongst us. That would be the Cackler and Tampon Tim for those in Rio Lindo.
You haven't seen any evidence of voter fraud, huh?
Tater Head got 81 million votes, huh? Roughly 16 million more than Hillary in 2016. Yeah right!
One must be completely out of their mind to think someone as unlikeable as Bidet, on full display in the District of Corruption for nearly 50 years (but hid in the basement during the presidential campaign), and supremely corrupt himself got that many votes. He was the laughingstock of the 1988 Democrat Presidential Primary for plagiarizing a speech (amongst other law school speeches), and has always been the school yard bully of the Beltway.
So, keep splitting hairs over President Trump's "likeability", and for Heaven's sake, don't concentrate on what he did in his first presidential term, before Covid anyways. He puts out mean tweets, after all. s/
You haven't seen any evidence of voter fraud, huh?
Tater Head got 81 million votes, huh? Roughly 16 million more than Hillary in 2016. Yeah right!
One must be completely out of their mind to think someone as unlikeable as Bidet, on full display in the District of Corruption for nearly 50 years (but hid in the basement during the presidential campaign), and supremely corrupt himself got that many votes. He was the laughingstock of the 1988 Democrat Presidential Primary for plagiarizing a speech (amongst other law school speeches), and has always been the school yard bully of the Beltway.
So, keep splitting hairs over President Trump's "likeability", and for Heaven's sake, don't concentrate on what he did in his first presidential term, before Covid anyways. He puts out mean tweets, after all. s/
JohnnyAlamo said:
Lifelong Republican but I just can't vote for Trump after the voter fraud debacle and J6. I want honest elections in this country, but I need to see evidence of the fraud that supposedly took place. It's been 4 years and nothing but unproved theories and rumors. I have serious concerns Trump would try to remain in office for a 3rd term based on his past behavior.
Interesting that you joined us just today. How much are you getting paid?
Just a typical...country boy?JohnnyAlamo said:
Lifelong Republican but I just can't vote for Trump after the voter fraud debacle and J6. I want honest elections in this country, but I need to see evidence of the fraud that supposedly took place. It's been 4 years and nothing but unproved theories and rumors. I have serious concerns Trump would try to remain in office for a 3rd term based on his past behavior.
Joes said:Tom Fox said:
Whether Trump is a good candidate or not is uninteresting. The interesting question is why would anyone vote for Kamala, much less half of Americans?
Insert Ryan Reynolds but why gif.
Just about half the country is going to vote against the other party regardless of who the candidates are. I can't believe this is still surprising to people. Minor 1-2% variations in circumstances are what will decide national elections. Joy Behar would get at least 48%. Bugs Bunny would get at least 48%. Joseph Stalin would get at least 48%. Beyonc would get at least 48%. A random plastic cup on the side of the road would get at least 48%. Because it's NOT the other party.
I'll repeat, but why? What is the other side voting for?
Because depending on the answer, who we run doesn't matter because if it would appeal to them it wouldn't be good for us. Then it is just getting your voters to vote.
LiarJohnnyAlamo said:
Lifelong Republican but I just can't vote for Trump after the voter fraud debacle and J6. I want honest elections in this country, but I need to see evidence of the fraud that supposedly took place. It's been 4 years and nothing but unproved theories and rumors. I have serious concerns Trump would try to remain in office for a 3rd term based on his past behavior.
That may be ~true. Here are the popular votes %s since JFK:
FWIW.
- LBJ won with 61.1% of the popular vote
- Nixon won with 43.4% and then 60.7% of the popular vote
- Carter won with 50.1% of the vote
- Reagan won with 50.7& and then 58.8% of the popular vote
- Bush won with 53.4% of the popular vote
- Clinton won with 43% and then 49.2% of the popular vote
- GW won with 47.9% and then 50.7% of the popular vote
- 0 won with 52.9% and then 51.0% of the popular vote
- Trump won with 46.2% of the popular vote
- Biden won with 51.3% of the popular vote
FWIW.
Gigem314 said:I'm all for a DeSantis or Youngkin ticket in 2028 that's Trump-like without as much controversy. But I believe we'll be having the same conversations about 'perception' and polls and questionable voting transparency in key states that we are now. It won't be much different.Quote:
Agree with this. The media is dishonest and utter propagandists for the Dem Party. That much has been proven by the way they covered up Joe's dementia and how their making the biggest empty suit of all time in Kamala look like a MENSA candidate.
I'm not convinced that the Dems didn't use the lawfare and every means they could (media, etc) to prop up Trump over DeSantis (or Haley, etc) because they're cynical enough to know and understand they have to have him at the top of the ticket to win. But when Biden's mental decline (he was already incapable by 2020 anyway) was laid completely bare they knee-capped him to put Harris into play.
They know this isn't about policy. It's about vibes and while Harris is awful the majority of what makes her awful can be hidden, have the messaging massaged, or explained away so the LIV and freeloaders will still vote for her.
The Trump campaign was caught off-guard and instead of being intelligent and disciplined resort to race-baiting and attacking Republicans whom they'll need to win. This reinforces the gettable folks in the middle who were coming around to him because Biden is a drooling nincompoop that maybe Harris can kinda, sorta, maybe be OK. Harris being a biracial woman also presents a similar vibe from the media that Obama did in 2008- they're creaming themselves over the the thought of a minority woman in the White House.
Then there's a massive amount of people who will just stay home.
He may be terrible in some ways but he won twice, not counting the fraud.rathAG05 said:
He was always a terrible candidate.
People like you are THE problem. What the ****.JohnnyAlamo said:
Lifelong Republican but I just can't vote for Trump after the voter fraud debacle and J6. I want honest elections in this country, but I need to see evidence of the fraud that supposedly took place. It's been 4 years and nothing but unproved theories and rumors. I have serious concerns Trump would try to remain in office for a 3rd term based on his past behavior.
About 40-45% of the country will vote for the dem candidate, regardless of who they are.
About 40-45% of the country will vote for the republican candidate, regardless of who they are.
That leaves the 10-20% undecideds up for grabs.
This election is going to get down to who turns off that 10-20% the most. Trump is a good candidate against opposition that also has very high negatives (see Hillary and enfeebled Biden). In a "who has the lowest negatives" race, Trump starts at a significant disadvantage. He is going to have to hope that once Kamala actually starts talking in public and really campaigning, her stupidity will bother people more that Trump's boorishness.
If he can manage to be the Trump from the first half of his acceptance speech for the next 3 months, it would help him considerably.
About 40-45% of the country will vote for the republican candidate, regardless of who they are.
That leaves the 10-20% undecideds up for grabs.
This election is going to get down to who turns off that 10-20% the most. Trump is a good candidate against opposition that also has very high negatives (see Hillary and enfeebled Biden). In a "who has the lowest negatives" race, Trump starts at a significant disadvantage. He is going to have to hope that once Kamala actually starts talking in public and really campaigning, her stupidity will bother people more that Trump's boorishness.
If he can manage to be the Trump from the first half of his acceptance speech for the next 3 months, it would help him considerably.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of miseries." - Winston Churchill
4stringAg said:Agree with this. The media is dishonest and utter propagandists for the Dem Party. That much has been proven by the way they covered up Joe's dementia and how their making the biggest empty suit of all time in Kamala look like a MENSA candidate.Gigem314 said:I agree that Trump's personality by nature gives his enemies more ammo...but some of you need to realize that even if he said nothing, the media would still find a narrative or past statement/association to make him look evil. They did it with Romney, who provided no more than a 'binder' or family trip with the dog or saying that people who don't pay taxes won't vote for him.4stringAg said:
If he gave them nothing and just stayed on message and policy points, they'd have to cover that.
The media is never going to lay off the Republican nominee. They will always find something. Every time. The key is making sure you have a nominee who fights back and can hammer away at the issues. That doesn't mean we need another Trump, but simply finding someone who isn't controversial is a fool's errand. The media will always make the Republican look controversial no matter how clean they are.
The media has been this way since at least the 1960 election. A lot of media tried to gaslight against Eisenhower too but he was too much of a national hero for it to have much effect.
Trump doesn't have a chance in this election. Voting is a religion to the left - not so much to the right.
Of course they have, but never to the levels we've seen since the 2000 election. And never to the level of trying to feed the narrative of getting a candidate convicted of false crimes. Or covering for a President that completely lacked the mental capacity to do the job. Very different.TarponChaser said:4stringAg said:Agree with this. The media is dishonest and utter propagandists for the Dem Party. That much has been proven by the way they covered up Joe's dementia and how their making the biggest empty suit of all time in Kamala look like a MENSA candidate.Gigem314 said:I agree that Trump's personality by nature gives his enemies more ammo...but some of you need to realize that even if he said nothing, the media would still find a narrative or past statement/association to make him look evil. They did it with Romney, who provided no more than a 'binder' or family trip with the dog or saying that people who don't pay taxes won't vote for him.4stringAg said:
If he gave them nothing and just stayed on message and policy points, they'd have to cover that.
The media is never going to lay off the Republican nominee. They will always find something. Every time. The key is making sure you have a nominee who fights back and can hammer away at the issues. That doesn't mean we need another Trump, but simply finding someone who isn't controversial is a fool's errand. The media will always make the Republican look controversial no matter how clean they are.
The media has been this way since at least the 1960 election. A lot of media tried to gaslight against Eisenhower too but he was too much of a national hero for it to have much effect.
Tom Fox said:Joes said:Tom Fox said:
Whether Trump is a good candidate or not is uninteresting. The interesting question is why would anyone vote for Kamala, much less half of Americans?
Insert Ryan Reynolds but why gif.
Just about half the country is going to vote against the other party regardless of who the candidates are. I can't believe this is still surprising to people. Minor 1-2% variations in circumstances are what will decide national elections. Joy Behar would get at least 48%. Bugs Bunny would get at least 48%. Joseph Stalin would get at least 48%. Beyonc would get at least 48%. A random plastic cup on the side of the road would get at least 48%. Because it's NOT the other party.
I'll repeat, but why? What is the other side voting for?
Because depending on the answer, who we run doesn't matter because if it would appeal to them it wouldn't be good for us. Then it is just getting your voters to vote.
I think you answered your own question. It's a team sport and that's all there is to it. And each side hopes more of their side shows up to vote than the other. I don't think there's ever much persuasion or convincing going on. The other side hates Trump and all republicans with a passion. Their candidate doesn't matter much. And our side is usually the same. Aggies would rather cheer for a 0-12 Aggie team than a 12-0 Texas team, that's exactly how people are with politics, only more so.
Your own side's flaws become irrelevant when the other side is the devil. And that's how both sides see each other now. I could laugh at the idea that someone would vote for Kamala instead of Trump but at the same time I know that I would honestly vote for a used Kleenex before I voted for her. And so would 99% of the people here. The only thing a "good" candidate does is possibly bring out the additional 1-2% that pushes you over the edge to win. 96% of all voters are locked in regardless.
He beat Hillary, the only candidate hated by more people than Trump himself.JamesE4 said:He may be terrible in some ways but he won twice, not counting the fraud.rathAG05 said:
He was always a terrible candidate.
Fake polls are fake.Who?mikejones! said:2024 National GE:
— Political Polls (@Politics_Polls) August 8, 2024
Harris 53% (+6)
Trump 47%
.
Harris 50% (+8)
Trump 42%
Kennedy 6%
Oliver 1%
Stein 1%
West 0%
.@MULawPoll, 683 LV, 7/24-8/1https://t.co/wwjYkVb7Mr
Still a way to go...but, it ain't looking good
Party ID from that poll.
D- 49%
R- 44%
I - 7%
Just read the editorial and agree. This is his election to lose, but he needs to be much more disciplined. He refuses to do that (it isn't enough to just win the election, he wants to win it while being an ******* / forcing people to validate his behavior), so I see this coming down to the wire. Good news for him, though, is Kamala really is a moron, so there's a a great chance she does something supremely stupid between now and election day.
Deputy Travis Junior said:
Just read the editorial and agree. This is his election to lose, but he needs to be much more disciplined. He refuses to do that (it isn't enough to just win the election, he wants to win it while being an ******* / forcing people to validate his behavior), so I see this coming down to the wire. Good news for him, though, is Kamala really is a moron, so there's a a great chance she does something supremely stupid between now and election day.
If she does something supremely stupid but the media refuses to report it, did it really happen? - Deep Thoughts by Jack Handy
Quite the opposite. That's why lower voter turnout favors Rs and Ds have to try extra hard to turn out the vote in order to have a chance.mlb87 said:
Trump doesn't have a chance in this election. Voting is a religion to the left - not so much to the right.
But regardless, he is probably sunk.
mlb87 said:
Trump doesn't have a chance in this election. Voting is a religion to the left - not so much to the right.
So what kind of odds would you give me? I say Trump wins. I assume you'd give me large odds since he has zero chance, or that he "doesn't have a chance in this election."
2:1?
5:1?
10:1?
20:1?
PM me and let set the terms.
rathAG05 said:
He was always a terrible candidate.
Thank you. I have been saying this for months now but y'all wouldn't listen to me.
He's a loser and he always has been. How is it possible to bankrupt four casinos? And Vance was a terrible, TERRIBLE choice. Of all the people he could have chosen, he chose the guy who referred to him as Hitler.
I was done with him after he trashed John McCain. That's unforgiveable in my eyes. Jan. 6 just solidified my opinion.
People are sick of his politics of grievance. Kamala is going run the hope and joy thing and crush him. The only question now is how bad the downballot carnage will be. The only good thing is that his political base will evaporate after this. Hopefully MAGA evaporates with him and the party moves on.
Should have voted for Nikki Haley, y'all. She would beat Kamala.
Rockdoc said:TexAgs91 said:
Republicans will 'blow' elections for as long as marxists cheat and they own 90% of the media
HTH
This is the correct response.
Nah. It's the weak ***** response when the side you support doesn't know how to effectively fight back and the glorified hero candidate can't be controlled by anyone. Just blame outside entities, not the root cause.
That said, I still think Trump can win...but like 2016 it won't be because of him, it will be in spite of others. That's not a healthy long term plan.
Trump is a better candidate than Kamala, but probably not good enough to overcome the media bias and the cheating. I still think DeSantis would have been better because he can actually delineate a better path forward, instead of the name calling contest we have now.
Aggie Apotheosis said:rathAG05 said:
He was always a terrible candidate.
Thank you. I have been saying this for months now but y'all wouldn't listen to me.
He's a loser and he always has been. How is it possible to bankrupt four casinos? And Vance was a terrible, TERRIBLE choice. Of all the people he could have chosen, he chose the guy who referred to him as Hitler.
I was done with him after he trashed John McCain. That's unforgiveable in my eyes. Jan. 6 just solidified my opinion.
People are sick of his politics of grievance. Kamala is going run the hope and joy thing and crush him. The only question now is how bad the downballot carnage will be. The only good thing is that his political base will evaporate after this. Hopefully MAGA evaporates with him and the party moves on.
Should have voted for Nikki Haley, y'all. She would beat Kamala.
So what kind of odds will you give me? I say Trump wins. I assume you'd give me large odds since Kamala will "crush him."
2:1?
5:1?
10:1?
20:1?
PM me and let set the terms.
Aggie Apotheosis said:rathAG05 said:
He was always a terrible candidate.
Thank you. I have been saying this for months now but y'all wouldn't listen to me.
He's a loser and he always has been. How is it possible to bankrupt four casinos? And Vance was a terrible, TERRIBLE choice. Of all the people he could have chosen, he chose the guy who referred to him as Hitler.
I was done with him after he trashed John McCain. That's unforgiveable in my eyes. Jan. 6 just solidified my opinion.
People are sick of his politics of grievance. Kamala is going run the hope and joy thing and crush him. The only question now is how bad the downballot carnage will be. The only good thing is that his political base will evaporate after this. Hopefully MAGA evaporates with him and the party moves on.
Should have voted for Nikki Haley, y'all. She would beat Kamala.